Wednesday, September 26, 2012

9/11 was a Hollywood-style special effects production - a gargantuan advertisement for genocide, designed to launch a 100-years-war on Islam on behalf of Zionism.

Since then, the incitement-to-genocide ads haven't let up. The latest examples include the "Innocence of Muslims" film provocation, and the New York City subway ads calling Muslims "savages" and cheering for the Zionist genocide of the Palestinians.

A brave New York journalist named Mona Eltahawy was recently arrested for "defacing" the pro-genocide ads.

Everyone associated with putting up these ads needs to be arrested, tried, and executed for incitement to genocide, right alongside the 9/11 perps and the complicit media bosses. And Mona Eltahawi should be freed and given an award for her resistance to crimes against humanity.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

As
the 11th anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Centre nears,
are we any closer to unravelling the mystery as to who carried them out?
Conspiracy theories abound, no widely convincing outcome of the attacks
has so far emerged. The report of the official inquiry commission
published by the US government has been wanting in many aspects. It is
more verbiage, regarding high-sounding government organisations and how
they reacted after the crisis, than a persuasive document.

Although
many books have been written on 9/11, five of them stand out because of
their lucidity and rationale: Thierry Meyssan’s 9/11 – the Big Lie,
David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Webster Griffin Tarpley’s
9/11: Synthetic Terror Made in USA, and Barry Zwicker’s Towers of
Deception: The media cover-up of 9/11. The event of the magnitude of
9/11 that changed the way of life of the multitude round the world
hasn’t been investigated to public satisfaction, nor its perpetrators
pointed out conclusively.

If the authors of these books
unequivocally agree on a single point, it is that demolition material
was used to bring the Twin Towers down within their own perimeters in a
symmetrical manner. Instead of analysing the steel bars found in the
debris for the telltale residual marks if detonating material had been
used or not, the bars were carted away overseas for melting.

However,
the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was quickly blamed for the
devastating attacks and the US demanded to hand over Osama bin Laden,
who it thought was the ideologue of the regime and mastermind of the
9/11 attacks. When the Taliban insisted that the US provide evidence of
Bin Laden’s involvement in the attacks, the superpower considered it an
affront by the cave-dwellers and invaded their rugged land.

The
above brings us to Osama bin Laden, ostensibly killed by the US Navy
Seals in Abbottabad in May 2011. The mythical crusader blamed for
masterminding attacks on the most guarded places in the world fell prey
to the Seals’ bullets and went down without a whimper. Craving for quick
publicity and a quicker buck, former Navy Seal Matt Bissonette has
authored a book, No Easy Day, in which he has presented his firsthand
account of the raid on bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad.

The
point to argue is why the Seals killed Bin Laden, the highest-value
target, instead of capturing him alive. The victim didn’t know he had
been located, nor did he know any operation to eliminate him was afoot.
Hence, the time factor, which is of great essence in such operations,
was in favour of the Seals. Laden alive would have been a billion-dollar
man since billions had been poured into Afghanistan to locate and
punish him. He could have been interrogated at Guantanamo or Bagram, a
confession of his culpability extracted from him and produced in US
courts to decide his fate.

Nevertheless, if the decision
to kill Bin Laden had been made, his remains could have been flown to
the US for morticians to restore his face and body, and to embalm them.
Thus, a mummified Bin Laden could have been placed in the national
museum for people to know that billions of their tax money spent on
waging wars hadn’t gone waste. Instead, according to Bissonette who
carried a measly $200 to bribe his way through if the mission failed but
wore night-vision goggles worth $65,000, contented himself only with
photographing Bin Laden with a digital camera.

The
“photographs are now under lock and key in the White House,” claimed the
writer. Only the American voters may ask President Obama to show
pictures of Bin Laden’s killing as proof before they vote for him in the
next election. The writer is a freelance columnist based in Lahore.

Thursday, September 20, 2012

Aangerfan points out that, according to Fareed Zakaria, the late Crown Prince Nayef of Saudi Arabia was murdered by the CIA. A possible motive: Nayef shook the world in 2001 when he "stated that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by the Jews." According to the New York Times:

"After the 9/11 hijackings, Prince Nayef infamously peddled the theory that the attacks were a Jewish plot...'The Saudis are being framed, accused of things that they did not do,' he said at a news conference at the time."

Al-Jazeera reports: "In November 2002, Nayef told the Arabic-language Kuwaiti daily Assyasah that Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks because they have benefited from subsequent criticism of Islam and Arabs."

Indeed, the primary beneficiary of the genocidal wave of islamophobia unleashed by 9/11 is the "Jewish state."

For some unknown reason, people who support the genocidal Big Lie that 9/11 was done by Muslims are rarely rebuked for their bigotry; while those like Alan Sabrosky and Prince Nayef who cite the undeniable and overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was perpetrated by and for supporters of the self-proclaimed "Jewish state," are smeared by the Zionist-dominated media.

As Alan Sabrosky, former Director of
Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, told
Press TV: “I have had long conversations over the past two
weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Marine Corps
Headquarters, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that
it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.
If Americans ever know that Israel did this, they are going to scrub
them off the earth.”

May Allah have mercy on Crown Prince Nayef, and forgive him his sins, considering his brave appeals for 9/11 truth.

"I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something
that I think is very important. It is that, you, we -- we own this
country. We -- we own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians
owning it. Politicians are employees of ours. And -- so -- they are
just going to come around and beg for votes every few years. It is the
same old deal. But I just think it is important that you realize that
you're the best in the world. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican
or whether you're libertarian or whatever, you are the best. And we
should not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, we
got to let them go. Okay, just remember that. And I'm speaking out for
everybody out there." - Clint Eastwood, from his speech at the 2012 Republican National Convention.

The reaction to Clint Eastwood's speech at the RNC has been mainly
negative. But I have a different and more positive view of the speech.

In an era of prepared and polished speeches given by
emotionally pulverized politicians it is refreshing to see a man on the
biggest national stage in America speak from his heart. It is a rare
sight. We never get to hear honest speeches in the house of illusions
that is Western politics.

There is nothing like an honest speech from the
heart, regardless of how it is delivered. People say Eastwood's
rugged speech was hard to watch. Really? Why is it hard to watch
a patriot give a real speech from the heart? It's much
more painful to watch fake men like Obama and Romney give fake but
polished speeches about absolute bullshit. Obama gives nothing but empty
platitudes so an empty chair suits him perfectly. Emptiness is the essence of his heart and soul.

Eastwood reminded all Americans, no matter their party loyalties, that politicians are
employees who are there to perform a public service, and who must be questioned, not
worshiped. He also introduced an important concept into the collective
psyche: Invisible Obama.

On the biggest questions, issues, and controversies
of the day, President Obama and the entire Western political class has
been invisible. They are invisible on the
issue of 9/11 truth; Indefinite detention of political dissidents;
Transnational banking fraud, and so many other political scandals. They
might as well not be there. They are not leaders of a grand civilization but political pimps of a dying one.

In his speech,
Eastwood addressed an invisible President Obama on an empty chair. It
worked well with the audience, but not with the viewers at home. It was a
gutsy move, though. And if you think it is hard
to carry on a make-believe conversation with an invisible Obama, it's
much harder to talk to the real Obama in person. From what I've read,
Obama is not "mentally there." He is not open, and that is not
a good leadership quality, especially when your country is in a crisis.

In this article, I've taken Eastwood's approach of
speaking to an invisible man on an empty chair and applied it to 9/11 truth. Imagine
if "9/11 truth" was an invisible chair of truth in a room full of invisible lies,
legends, fantasy, and falsehoods. What follows is my dialogue with this
invisible chair.

II. Lifting The Cloak of Invisibility: Talking To The Invisible Chair of 9/11 Truth

Excavator: Invisible 9/11 truth, who sits on your golden
throne? How
can an individual who is on the stage of life and the journey of
self-discovery carry on a conversation with you? And why are you
rejected by the spellbound audience as unreal and invisible? Are they
right? Am I speaking to a non-entity? Are the rumours of your existence
just crazy rumours or are you real?

Invisible 9/11 Truth Chair [ITC]: Oh,
I'm real alright. But to answer your question in more depth, it depends
on who you ask in the audience. Some doubt my existence and call you
crazy for pointing me out in the room. And there are some others such as
enlightened sufis who consider me an empty truth on an invisible chair.
They pay me no mind. They know I exist, but I mean nothing to them
because they view me as an inferior form of truth. So they treat me as
invisible because they have their eye on a higher truth.

Excavator: A higher truth? Interesting. So you are a lesser
truth compared to other invisible, greater truths? If so, then what is
your relationship to them? Do your foot stools open or block the gateway
of the visible world to a richer reality? And do your foot stools open
the door of death in the mind? If so, why? Why not move away from the
entrance and let the door
close shut in our house of reality? Even if it is a constructed reality,
why ruin the intellectual infrastructure of a perfectly good house? Why
let in the wind of death into the quiet rooms of the sleeping guests?

Is this
house of reality not good enough for you? Does it stink with lies? But
what house doesn't stink with lies on this plane of existence? And is
not the
sweet smell of lies better than the rotten smell of death? Why replace
the sweet smell with the rotten smell? You are just a chair. You can
stand the smell of death. But what about those who sit on you? They were
lying on the floor of legends and lies with content and calm before
they awoke and saw you in the corner of the room.
You expect them to stop lying down with bliss in their hearts and sit up
straight on a cold, wooden chair, frozen with terror?

ITC: I cannot speak for the souls
who choose to sit on me over another chair, whether invisible or not,
and whether in this or that house. They are free to come and
go as they please. As for the charge that my poor little foot stools jam
the doorway to the outside world and bring in the wind and smell of
death into the house, all I can say is
what kind of house do you want to live in? A house that is filled with
illusions and stops the terror of death at the door? If a house of
illusions, shadows, and moral corruption is good enough for you then be
my guest.

Or do you want to live in a house that
takes as its foundations all the facts of existence and life? Which
house is the healthier house? The wind of death will enter your little
house any way because there is no escaping this wind. You can either welcome
this wind as a guest or it will knock down the foundations of your false house
with the velocity that only the force of nature is capable of.

Excavator: Enough talk of death. Let's change the subject. What
if newly awakened souls realize that you are only a small chair of
truth with only a smattering of gold covering? What if they look into
the distance and see there is a bigger chair in the house down the
street? Which chair should the soul sit on? What do you advise a soul to
do in this situation?

Should those
who walk on the path of self-discovery in the night sit on you at the
end of their painful journey at the break of dawn? Or are you too cold
and hard for their tired legs, souls, and arms? Why shouldn't they sit
on a chair that is soft and has rainbow coloring? If it gives them joy
and relief, then why not sit on the chair where the sun's radiant light
shines upon it rather than a chair that stands in the bitter shade?

ITC: Every soul has its own
preference. I am not an envious chair. I do not ask to be sat on. I
represent life to one soul and death to another. Some souls choose
the shadow
of death in place of the sun of life for their own reasons. Some see no
sun in this life but only the shadow of death. Of course,
it is easy to mistake the two. For instance, in a room coloured by
falsehoods and deceptions one loses sight of what's real; of what's the
light and what's the shadow. But I cannot decide for the soul. It
depends on its own sense of perception,
intelligence, judgment, and other factors. Some souls do not like the
air and quality of real
chairs so they mark them as invisible, as they did with me at first.

Excavator: What do you make of the charge that you are a conspiracy chair?

ITC: That is a funny charge against me. Before I was the
invisible chair. I was not to be even considered. I was not in the room.
I was non-existent. But the force of reality imposed itself, forcing
the half-awake audience and its spiritual managers to at least recognize
that I exist.

It is a funny charge because I
can't be both an invisible chair and a conspiracy chair. I am a visible chair of truth. Since my accusers have conceded on the
point of my existence, they must take me seriously. But they don't. I'm
pushed to the side of the room. They say only the fringe lunatics gather
around me. But is truth fringe? Is justice fringe? Is God fringe? Is
the global movement for world peace and universal brotherhood fringe?
How can I be fringe when souls the world over discover me and stand by
me? I am the furthest thing from a conspiracy chair and a fringe chair.

Excavator:
Okay. You're not a conspiracy chair. That has been established. I want to move on. Where do you
stand in the hierarchy of the invisible world of chairs? Are you the only invisible chair of truth? And what about
the visible world? Is the visible electric chair on death row your
cousin? Is the visible chair of torture your cellmate in the invisible
prison?

ITC: I am sorry
but I cannot assist you in the journey to the invisible world of chairs or show
you the way. I have said too much already. I cannot answer your
questions. They are for you to discover at your own pace. It takes regular spiritual exercises to reach
the level of understanding that you seem to be aiming for.

Excavator: Fair enough. I'll ask you more specific questions.
Many of the people who sit on you are described as "truthers." What do
you think of them? And who else sits on you? Do you expect a president
of the US empire to sit on you? Is not his ass of lies too big for you?
He will break you down to pieces, will he not? And what about God? Is he
the pilot and are you the chair in the cockpit?

ITC: God is too big for me. And he is not a sitter. As for the
"truthers," they know I exist because they can see and feel me. They
cannot be persuaded that I am invisible and unreal by the managers of
public thoughts and perceptions. They are not crazy because I am not the
chair for the mentally handicapped.

Excavator: One final question. What did you think about Clint
Eastwood's fictional encounter with an invisible Obama represented by an
empty chair at the RNC?

ITC: It was a neat dramatic invention by a master director
through which Obama's empty soul was revealed to the American people on a
big stage.